Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores 23.8 points higher (39.9 vs 16.1) but costs 3.2× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $823; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 16.1, and Gemini 2.5 Pro when 16.1 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.1 | 39.9 | +147.8% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 2.5× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $822.85 | $2,632.05 | +219.9% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 3.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 30.16s | 65.43s | +116.9% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 116.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $10.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Gemini 2.5 Pro: 147.8% more intelligence, 219.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 116.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 2.5 Pro is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Gemini 2.5 ProQwen3.8 2.4T A95BToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemini-2-5-pro/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-2-5-pro/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill